I'm merely pointing out the fact that Paul's description of the law on marriage doesn't fit the Mosaic laws on marriage.
There are two possible views on this :
* Paul is making a mistake
* Paul isn't referring to the Mosaic law, at least not in the most literal sense
Quest (03-03-2020)
In the New Covenant the nearest relative doesn't have to marry the remaining wife whose husband has died, neither is it compulsory for a man to marry a woman if he got her pregnant.
So these laws no longer apply
Ezekiel 33 (02-10-2020)
Well that's the conclusion, that we have been released from the law as it is according to the letter so that we may serve according to the law of the Spirit instead (2 Cor 3). But that is the result of our being released from the law, not the law itself. The law itself is what he's discussing in verses 1-3 and the details lead me to question what law he is talking about. As a brilliant Pharisee Paul ought to know that Deut 24 says something different than what he says in those verses.
Should one automatically assume that he is talking about the literal law of Moses even when the details don't match up with that notion ? I don't think so.
Ezekiel 33 (02-10-2020)
He may be referring to contemporary Jewish law on marriage which may have involved restrictions added to the law of Moses. The Pharisees that Jesus talked to about this matter seem liberally minded but it could be that they added restrictions specifically in the case of women.
Ezekiel 33 (02-10-2020), Quest (03-03-2020)
Interesting...Jesus said in Matthew 19 that if a man divorces his wife for any reason other than infidelity HE was an adultery if he remarried.
Did the law of Moses give room for divorce for any reason? Jesus seemed to be saying that only for adultery should it happen ...is the key in WHY one divorces that makes one an adulterer if they remarry?
Quest (03-03-2020)